Despite what you may have picked up from the commercials, Swing Vote is not really a political movie. Yes, the story is about what happens when a presidential election ends in a tie and everything comes down to the vote of a single citizen given 10 days to recast his faulty ballot. Swing Vote is not an examination of political reality. It is not asking what would happen in this situation, but rather what would this situation, however unreal, reveal about us.
It is a good thing that the movie isn’t really about politics because all of the players in that game—from presidential candidates Andrew Boone (Kelsey Grammar) and Donald Greenleaf (Dennis Hopper) to campaign managers played by Stanley Tucci and Nathan Lane to news producer John Sweeney (George Lopez)—are all presented as so avaricious that no real subtlety is allowed. Perhaps it isn’t too far from the truth that everybody making their living in politics are cynically engaged in their own self-aggrandizement, but it doesn’t really make for an interesting movie.
In reality, the movie is about the relationship between a precocious 11-year-old Molly (Madeline Carroll) and her nobody of a failed father Bud (Kevin Costner). What happens when Bud suddenly goes from a nobody to a somebody, however brief that flash in the pan may be. Fortunately, there are two pretty decent stories in that relationship. Carroll is superb in her performance, somehow perfectly conveying how much she loves her father and how much he disappoints her. Costner also is pretty good playing the shiftless loser slowly forced to realize just how complicit he has been in achieving that status.
Unfortunately, the two good stories don’t go together well, at least not presented on screen. The problem is that, despite everything, we are supposed to like Bud. That might be possible if the character of Molly were his adult girlfriend, but it is much more difficult when she’s his 11-year-old daughter. Then it becomes no longer remotely funny when he passes out in his truck outside a bar and Molly has to drive him home. It is hard to find a chuckle when a late night visit from government officials is assumed to be Child Protective Services come to take her away. Or that he gets fired from his job at an egg packaging plant for drinking on the job. That he takes her fishing instead of taking her to school. It is simply sad and pathetic.
Madeline Carroll, the youngest actor on the set, seems to be the only one who realizes that. She doesn’t give an “aw shucks” shrug whenever Bud does something wrong, you can see in her eyes she is truly torn between loving and hating him, wondering if this life she has really is the best option available. Carroll recognizes that the relationship centering this movie is not a comedy, or if it is then it is a very dark comedy.
Costner, on the other hand, is playing the lovable goof—and it just doesn’t match up. There isn’t enough darkness in his characterization to match up with the way Carroll is playing it. He simply has so much charisma as an actor that it may not have been possible for him to be bad enough. Throughout the movie, I was thinking that his role would have been great in the hands of somebody like Steve Buscemi. For Costner, the only way to try and counteract the natural charisma is to cover him in idiocy, for he is a man who not only is indifferent to the political world, but doesn’t seem to be aware there is one.
I have no idea what the history is for getting this movie made but it really feels like a victim of its own success. Something that was written and envisioned as a little independent film with an $8 million budget that suddenly found Disney at the door saying, “Here, have $45 million and by the way, we think we can get Kevin Costner to do it.” Artistically the best answer would be to say no, but how does one do that?
There’s also a temptation to blame the mismatched tones on sophomore director Joshua Michael Stern not understanding and screwing up the screenplay. Except that he co-wrote the film with Jason Richman. Maybe Richman was responsible for the dark tones while Stern wrote all the soft-hitting satire. The contradictions continue, though. After all, it is hard to take seriously from Disney any hint of it being wrong that our government is really selling itself for votes when Disney spends millions of dollars a year attempting to buy those votes.
Finally, there is of course the Disney’s California Adventure question. Just as it was wondered why people who live in California would want to go to a park with California as its theme, one has to wonder how many people will have any interest in seeing a movie about a presidential campaign (however tangential that really is) in the middle of one of the most interesting and dynamic real presidential campaigns in quite a long while. Personally, I’m something of a political junkie and even I went into the theater grumbling a bit about overkill. Fortunately for me, the politics were secondary, although that isn’t the way its being sold.
So let’s talk a bit about the politics; to the extent that there has been any buzz for this movie, it has been in trying to suss out its biases. Kelsey Grammar is Republican president Boone seeking his second election and his campaign is run by a Karl Rove-like Stanley Tucci. As far as the movie is concerned, this side exists in a state of vicious inanity. Good at winning but not really having any ideas. On the other side is Hopper’s Democratic contender Greenleaf, in a campaign managed by six-time national campaign loser Nathan Lane. This corner represents ideology compromised by the despair of realizing that an idea has no chance if it can’t win an election.
Political issues are raised in the movie but for fear of turning off any part of the audience, never actually discussed. They come up only so Bud can give a stupid sound bite and the campaigners can rush out with what they think is a campaign ad sure to win his support. This happens four times in the movie, and only once is the result funny—when Greenleaf makes an uncomfortable though hilariously inappropriate pro-life commercial. It would be difficult to find the movie ever overtly taking sides, but for those reading who care much, I’d say that it is softly more sympathetic to the Democratic Party side of issues. Again, though, it is really hard to tell because it is never acknowledged that there are underlying reasons for taking a position beyond simple party loyalty.
There are several amusing bits in the movie, and if you do wander in to see it you won’t leave absolutely hating the movie. Madeline Carroll is very good and one dramatic scene in the final act is totally misplaced in this movie but showcases the potential if everybody involved had been dedicated to bringing the dark undertones closer to the surface. Ultimately, though, the movie is torn apart by its own contradictions in tone and presentation. Nobody will regret passing on this one, though I wouldn’t mind seeing the Molly character ripped from this script and given to a filmmaker who would consider themselves extremely lucky to make a movie with her that one day might be shown late at night on the Independent Film Channel. Some movies are too big for their britches, but this is one where the britches are simply too big for the movie.
Swing Vote is a Touchstone Pictures release
- Wide release on Friday, August 1, 2008
- Directed by Joshua Michael Stern
- Screenplay by Joshua Michael Stern and Jason Richman
- Starring: Kevin Costner, Madeline Carroll, Kelsey Grammar, Dennis Hopper, Nathan Lane, Stanley Tucci
- Rated PG-13 for language
- Runtime: 100 minutes
- Alex’s Rating: 5 out of 10
